as someone who has organized speaking engagements for large companies, including being part of the negotiations over the price, i will say with a high degree of confidence that most people who talk about these engagements usually do not know what they are talking about.

the whole thing is simultaneously much more *and* much less corrupt than most people realize.

*most* of the time, an executive watches a ted talk or reads a HBR essay and thinks that the employee base might benefit from hearing someone speak. like, that’s 97% of these engagements. it doesn’t have much, if anything, to do with secret back door influence purchasing.

companies go along with it, because in some cases, they really do think it’ll provide value to the employees, in some cases, it’s good for their tax bills, and in some cases, they recognize everyone wants a paid afternoon off and a fancy catered lunch.

when it comes to wall street specifically, you have to understand that hiring is fiercely competitive and that they’re competing with other firms *and* big tech at this point. getting the best and brightest speakers is a talent acquisition expense. it’s advertising.

it’s fine to think that people shouldn’t be paid this much for speeches, but understand that what you are making is an anti-capitalist argument, not an anti-corruption argument, and most of the people who write about these things would never in a million years argue the former.

what i would like is for journalists to focus on why the tax code encourages companies to do this, or to pay people as consultants, because that’s where the real dirt is, but journalists are infamously fucking terrible at tax policy stories because they are bored by them.

FAMOUS EXPERT RAKES IN MILLIONS IN CONSULTING FEES is a much sexier headline than CAPEX AND OPEX SPENDING: UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS but the latter would be significantly more informative to the general public.

i will add that the politics-to-political speeches track is SIGNIFICANTLY more corrupt than the politics-to-corporate lunch track. corporations at least have boards and shareholders they answer to. but we don’t see a lot of stories about that.

also, these things aren’t always entirely meaningless. if you wanted to try to initiate some new major change in how your company operates, you’re going to need fireworks to get everyone’s attention. it probably won’t work, because entropy is eternal, but i understand the effort.

also, too, if you are a well-known, well-connected “expert”, there are a million other more nefarious ways to make much more money than by public speaking